Advertisement

Genetic and Demographic Considerations in the Sampling and Reintroduction of Rare Plants

  • Edward O. GuerrantJr.

Abstract

We are witness to what paleontologists of the distant future may record as one of the few truly great mass extinctions of the last half billion years. Simultaneously, there is an increasing homogenization of regional biotas resulting from human-mediated long-distance dispersal, especially of weedy colonizing species. Thus these same future paleontologists could justifiably name our time the “Homogecene” epoch. Habitat destruction and fragmentation caused by human land use, combined with probable global warming and atmospheric ozone depletion, stress even further the ability of our remaining natural areas to support their native flora and fauna. We must act now if we are to bequeath to our distant descendants a world whose biodiversity is only minimally more degraded than the one we inherited.

Keywords

Annual Grass Rare Plant Seed Collection Recovery Effort Plant Conservation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Barrett, S.C.H., Kohn, J.R. 1991. Genetic and evolutionary consequences of small population size in plants: Implications for conservation. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, ed. D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 3–30. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Brauner, S. 1988. Malheur wirelettuce (Stephanomeria malheurensis) biology and interactions with cheatgrass: 1987 study results and recommendations for a recovery plan. Report to Burns District, Oregon, Bureau of Land Management. Submitted 20 June 1988.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, A.H.D., Briggs, J.D. 1991. Sampling strategies for genetic variation in ex situ collections of endangered plant species. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, ed. D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 99–119. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Center for Plant Conservation. 1991. Appendix. Genetic sampling guidelines for conservation collections of endangered plants. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, ed. D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 225–38. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Falk, D.E., Holsinger, K.E. eds. 1991. Genetics and conservation of rare plants. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Gilpin, M.E. 1987. Spatial structure and population vulnerability. In Viable populations for conservation, ed. M.E. Soulé, 125–39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gilpin, M.E., Soulé, M.E. 1986. Minimum viable populations: Processes of species extinction. In Conservation biology: The science of scarcity and diversity, ed. M.E. Soulé, 19–34. Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer.Google Scholar
  8. Gottlieb, L.D. 1973. Genetic differentiation, sympatric speciation and the origin of a diploid species of Stephanomeria. Am. J. Bot. 60: 545–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gilpin, M.E., Soulé, M.E. 1977. Phenotypic variation in Stephanomeria exigua ssp. coronaria (Compositae) and its recent derivative species “malheurensis.” Am. J. Bot. 64: 873–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gilpin, M.E., Soulé, M.E. 1978. Allocation, growth rates and gas exchange in seedlings of Stephan-omeria exigua ssp. coronaria and its recent derivative S. malheurensis. Am. J. Bot. 65: 970–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gilpin, M.E., Soulé, M.E. 1979. The origin of phenotype in a recently evolved species. In Topics in plant population biology, ed. O.T Solbrig, S. Jain, G.B. Johnson, and P.H. Raven, 264 - 86. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Gilpin, M.E., Soulé, M.E. 1983. Interference between individuals in pure and mixed cultures of Stephanomeria malheurensis and its progenitor. Am. J. Bot. 70: 276–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gilpin, M.E., Soulé, M.E. 1991. The Malheur wire-lettuce: A rare, recently evolved Oregon species.Google Scholar
  14. Kalmiopsis. J. Native Plant Soc. Oregon 1: 9–13.Google Scholar
  15. Hamrick, J.L. 1989. Isozymes and the analysis of genetic structure in plant populations. In Isozymes in plant biology, ed. D.E. Soltis and P.S. Soltis, 87–105. Portland: Dioscorides Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hamrick, J.L., Godt, M.J.W. 1989. Allozyme diversity in plant species. In Plant population genetics, breeding, and genetic resources, ed. A.D.H Brown, M.T. Clegg, A.L. Kahler, and B.S. Weir, 43–63. Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer.Google Scholar
  17. Hamrick, J.L., Godt, M.J.W., Murawski, D.A., Loveless, D.A. 1991. Correlations between species traits and allozyme diversity: Implications for conservation biology. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, ed. D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 75–86. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Harris, R.B., Allendorf, F.W. 1989. Genetically effective population size of large mammals: An assessment of estimators. Cons. Biol. 3: 181–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Holsinger, K.E., Gottlieb, L.D. 1991. Conservation of rare and endangered plants: Principles and prospects. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, ed. D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 195–208. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Lande, R. 1988. Genetics and demography in biological conservation. Science 241: 1455–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lesica, P. 1990. Habitat requirements, germination behavior and seed bank dynamics of Howellia aquatilis in the Swan Valley, Montana. Report submitted to Flathead National Forest, Montana.Google Scholar
  22. Menges, E.S. 1990. Population viability analysis for an endangered plant. Cons. Biol. 4: 52–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Menges, E.S. 1991a. Seed germination percentage increases with population size in a fragmented prairie species. Cons. Biol. 5: 158–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Menges, E.S. 1991b. The application of minimum viable population theory to plants. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, ed. D.E. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 45–61. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Olwell, P., Cully, A., Knight, P., Brack, S. 1987. Pediocactus knowltonii recovery efforts. In Conservation and management of rare and endangered plants, ed. T.S. Elias, 519–22. Sacramento: California Native Plant Society.Google Scholar
  26. Oregon Department of Agriculture, compiler. 1989. State list of endangered and threatened plant species. OAR-603-73-070. Updated 27 October 1989.Google Scholar
  27. Ornduff, R. 1976. The reproductive system of Amsinckia grandiflora, a distylous species. Syst. Bot. 1: 57–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Parenti, R.L., Guerrant, E.O. Jr. 1990. Down but not out: Reintroduction of the extirpated Malheur wirelettuce, Stephanomeria malheurensis. Endang. Spec. Update 8: 62–63.Google Scholar
  29. Pavlik, B.M. 1990. Reintroduction of Amsinckia grandiflora to Stewartville. Report prepared for Endangered Plant Program, California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, Calif.Google Scholar
  30. Pavlik, B.M. 1991. Reintroduction of Amsinckia grandiflora to three sites across its historic range. Report prepared for Endangered Plant Program, California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, Calif.Google Scholar
  31. Rabinowitz, D. 1981. Seven forms of rarity. In The biological aspects of rare plant conservation, ed. H. Synge, 205–17. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  32. Rabinowitz, D., Rapp, J.K., Cairns, S., Mayer, M. 1989. The persistence of rare prairie grasses in Missouri: Environmental variation buffered by reproductive output of sparse species. Am. Nat. 134: 525–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schoen, D.J., Stewart, S.C. 1986. Variation in male reproductive investment and male reproductive success in white spruce. Evolution 40: 1109–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schmidt, J. 1980. Pollination foraging behavior and gene dispersal in Senecio (Compositae). Evolution 34: 934–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shaffer, M.L. 1981. Minimum population size for species conservation. Bio- Science 31: 131–34.Google Scholar
  36. Soulé, M.E., ed. 1987. Viable populations for conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Templeton, A.R. 1990. The role of genetics in captive breeding and reintroduction for species conservation. Endang. Spec. Update 8: 14–17.Google Scholar
  38. Templeton, A.R. 1991. Off-site breeding of animals and implications for plant conservation strategies. In Genetics and conservation of rare plants, ed. D.A. Falk and K.E. Holsinger, 182–94. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Interior. 1991. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants$150 C.F.R. 17.11 and 17. 12. 15 July 1991.Google Scholar
  40. Wallace, S.R. 1990. Central Florida Scrub: Trying to save the pieces. Endang. Spec. Update 8: 59–61.Google Scholar
  41. Wicklow-Howard, M. 1991. Malheur wirelettuce research study annual report 1990. Report submitted to Burns District, Oregon. Bureau of Land Management.Google Scholar
  42. Wright, S. 1982. Character change, speciation, and the higher taxa. Evolution 36: 427–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Routledge, Chapman & Hall, Inc. and Diane C. Fiedler 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edward O. GuerrantJr.

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations